As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Moments of the Week 04/30/08

1246

Posts

  • PantheraOncaPantheraOnca Registered User regular
    edited May 2008

    For example, I'm not legally allowed to beat someone up because I want to. I have the physical ability to do so, but I'm legally prohibited because our society of laws requires me to respect the rights of the person I'm looking at.

    ok, but you always have the potential to do this.

    that doesn't mean that the government can conscript you into anything. you have to actually violate someone else's rights before the government will intervene. (or possibly if you threaten to do so)

    basically, what i see you as arguing in the above is that just because you may possibly do something that is native to you, the government can run your life.

    PantheraOnca on
  • BalefuegoBalefuego Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    You guys are getting some weird ideas, they are not required to become soldiers. All they are requiered to do is pass Initiative training. After that they don't have to join one of the superteams if they don't want to.

    Balefuego on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FCDFCD Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Balefuego wrote: »
    You guys are getting some weird ideas, they are not required to become soldiers. All they are requiered to do is pass Initiative training. After that they don't have to join one of the superteams if they don't want to.

    Where has that been stated?

    FCD on
    Gridman! Baby DAN DAN! Baby DAN DAN!
  • BalefuegoBalefuego Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Pretty sure that was stated in The Initiative

    I dont have my issues here at work.

    It should also be noted that much of what Gyrich was doing was just him abusing his position to build his own little superhuman army and is no really representative of what the Initiative is supposed to be doing.

    Balefuego on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • tehfalconertehfalconer moonrocks in my noseRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Balefuego wrote: »
    You guys are getting some weird ideas, they are not required to become soldiers. All they are requiered to do is pass Initiative training. After that they don't have to join one of the superteams if they don't want to.
    I'm pretty sure its been said multiple times in a few comics that after you "graduate" from the initiative, you are assigned to one of the 50 States teams.

    tehfalconer on
    ... you will be the falcon, and I shall remain... The Falconer!
  • BalefuegoBalefuego Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    If you want to be a superhero yes then you are assigned to a team.

    Balefuego on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    FCD wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Matt, I don't think you want to go with the car driving analogy in this case. I think it's fair to say that your ability and desire to drive a car does not then mean that the government can or should impose unreasonable requirements on you so that you can drive a car. Cloud 9 has the ability and desire to fly, but in order to do so she's required to go to boot camp to become a soldier in a superhero army. This would be like you wanting to drive a car, but the government telling you that the only way you can drive a car is by joining the army and becoming a tank driver.

    Exactly. Why must the only way to be a reged superhuman be to take on the role of a solider? Why aren't there any desk jobs and non-millitary government work for superhumans who just don't want to go to jail?

    We don't know there aren't. The options aren't 'service or jail', they're 'service or suppression/removal of powers'. I can't state this more clearly: there is no "right" to exercise your natural abilities within a society of laws. We routinely make it criminal to exercise your natural, physical abilities.

    For example, I'm not legally allowed to beat someone up because I want to. I have the physical ability to do so, but I'm legally prohibited because our society of laws requires me to respect the rights of the person I'm looking at.

    Similarly, my very freedom of speech is limited where it would interfere with others, because that's one of the prices of living in a society of laws: reciprocal restrictions of freedoms.

    Just because you're born with the ability to fly, doesn't mean you have the right to do so, unless you want to leave our society.

    My problem with your analogy is that licensing Cloud 9 to fly with her power is functionally equivalent to licensing her to fly a plane. You don't have to join the Air Force to become a licensed pilot. I consider the requirements that were placed on her to be licensed to use her power to be unreasonable. Also being licensed to fly isn't the same as being licensed to beat someone up.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Balefuego wrote: »
    If you want to use your powers for any reason whatsoever yes then you are assigned to a team.

    Fencingsax on
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Sentry wrote: »
    Man... a bash Black Panther derailment and an SHRA derailment filled with Matt's complete and utter nonsense? Both in the same 1-2 week time frame? Man... is it Hanukah again?

    Man, a a Sentry posting "complete and utter nonsense" without rebutting any arguments, is it every post of Sentry's again?

    Do you have a "stop whining" button we can press, or is this your only mode?

    And can you explain how it's a derailment when we're talking about the contents of a "moment of the week' scene?

    Well, allow me to retort blowhard...
    (a) Slavery is nonsense; at the very least, they're paid. At the very least, you can give up your powers (which you have no right to use, anyway) and leave. These are all inconsistent with the concept of "slavery". Hyperbole is damaging to your argument.

    The full of shit meter is off the chart... this is freaking fantastic... hey, you have to do everything we say or we will kill you... but here's some money. That isn't slavery, we paid you, didn't we?

    Hey, you don't have to join us... but if you don't, you have to undergo a horrific, untested procedure to have your natural, inate powers complete ripped out of you.

    Perhaps Mattharvest, you should change your name to Mengele, because you seem to have very similar ideas about what does and does not cross the line of moral degredation.

    Sentry on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    My problem with your analogy is that licensing Cloud 9 to fly with her power is functionally equivalent to licensing her to fly a plane. You don't have to join the Air Force to become a licensed pilot. I consider the requirements that were placed on her to be licensed to use her power to be unreasonable. Also being licensed to fly isn't the same as being licensed to beat someone up.

    You're aware that today, all American males are required to register for the Selective Service (i.e. draft), right? You're aware that the US courts have found - resoundingly - that not only is the draft constitutional, but it's also constitutional for it to be male-only.

    Part of living in any given society - American or otherwise - is that you sacrifice some of your freedoms, to protect others and gain new privileges as well. In American society, one of those sacrifices is the Selective Service. Another is eminent domain (the government's ability to seize privately held property for the public good, with compensation). Another is the ability of the government to impose time-place-manner restrictions on speech. All of these laws are restrictions on our natural abilities and rights, which we submit to in exchange for other benefits (e.g. police, military protection, etc.).

    A draft for superpowered individuals - as I've already exhaustively explained a year ago - would easily pass constitutional muster for even stronger reasons than the existing draft for males. I don't think you could find a single legal theorist who could articulate reasons why it wouldn't.

    The simple fact is that superpowers completely shatter the paradigm of rights regarding natural abilities, because those powers are potentially catastrophically powerful. Easy example: the uses Cloud 9 has already shown of her powers could be used for trivially easy mass murder by hurling a crowd of people into the sky. She could then escape at a tremendous velocity (I'm not aware of her max speed). Talking about your right to use your inborn ability to fly, read minds, hurl lightning bolts, manipulate the weather, etc. is essentially non-sensical within our real-world concepts of ethics. Our moral philosophies depend on the idea that humans are homologous, but superpowers by definition violate that assumption. All moral philosophies would have to be reevaluated accordingly.

    Now, as for Sentry: your ridiculous hyperbole, Godwining of the thread, etc. make it eminently obvious how much logic and reason you're willing to bring to the discussion. If you feel like making arguments without resorting to insult and exaggeration, I'll be happy to engage in discussion.

    mattharvest on
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Totally, lets talk about how you justify government mandated genetic manipulation to remove an innate talent.

    Go on, justify it.

    Sentry on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I think history has shown us that this isn't a productive line of discussion, at least when the SHRA is as unclear as it is.

    Robos A Go Go on
  • FCDFCD Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    My problem with your analogy is that licensing Cloud 9 to fly with her power is functionally equivalent to licensing her to fly a plane. You don't have to join the Air Force to become a licensed pilot. I consider the requirements that were placed on her to be licensed to use her power to be unreasonable. Also being licensed to fly isn't the same as being licensed to beat someone up.

    You're aware that today, all American males are required to register for the Selective Service (i.e. draft), right? You're aware that the US courts have found - resoundingly - that not only is the draft constitutional, but it's also constitutional for it to be male-only.

    Part of living in any given society - American or otherwise - is that you sacrifice some of your freedoms, to protect others and gain new privileges as well. In American society, one of those sacrifices is the Selective Service. Another is eminent domain (the government's ability to seize privately held property for the public good, with compensation). Another is the ability of the government to impose time-place-manner restrictions on speech. All of these laws are restrictions on our natural abilities and rights, which we submit to in exchange for other benefits (e.g. police, military protection, etc.).

    A draft for superpowered individuals - as I've already exhaustively explained a year ago - would easily pass constitutional muster for even stronger reasons than the existing draft for males. I don't think you could find a single legal theorist who could articulate reasons why it wouldn't.

    The simple fact is that superpowers completely shatter the paradigm of rights regarding natural abilities, because those powers are potentially catastrophically powerful. Easy example: the uses Cloud 9 has already shown of her powers could be used for trivially easy mass murder by hurling a crowd of people into the sky. She could then escape at a tremendous velocity (I'm not aware of her max speed). Talking about your right to use your inborn ability to fly, read minds, hurl lightning bolts, manipulate the weather, etc. is essentially non-sensical within our real-world concepts of ethics. Our moral philosophies depend on the idea that humans are homologous, but superpowers by definition violate that assumption. All moral philosophies would have to be reevaluated accordingly.

    While the reality of superpowers would bring up new moral problems, it would not invalidate the humanity and rights of those who possessed said superpowers.

    FCD on
    Gridman! Baby DAN DAN! Baby DAN DAN!
  • OrogogusOrogogus San DiegoRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Sentry wrote: »
    Totally, lets talk about how you justify government mandated genetic manipulation to remove an innate talent.

    Go on, justify it.

    Genetics in the Marvel universe are nothing like the real world. If it's possible to have machines that detect people with "innate talents", then that certainly seems a lot more viable than it would be in real life. What are you supposed to do with people whose innate talent is "death factor"?

    Orogogus on
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    My problem with your analogy is that licensing Cloud 9 to fly with her power is functionally equivalent to licensing her to fly a plane. You don't have to join the Air Force to become a licensed pilot. I consider the requirements that were placed on her to be licensed to use her power to be unreasonable. Also being licensed to fly isn't the same as being licensed to beat someone up.

    You're aware that today, all American males are required to register for the Selective Service (i.e. draft), right? You're aware that the US courts have found - resoundingly - that not only is the draft constitutional, but it's also constitutional for it to be male-only.

    Part of living in any given society - American or otherwise - is that you sacrifice some of your freedoms, to protect others and gain new privileges as well. In American society, one of those sacrifices is the Selective Service. Another is eminent domain (the government's ability to seize privately held property for the public good, with compensation). Another is the ability of the government to impose time-place-manner restrictions on speech. All of these laws are restrictions on our natural abilities and rights, which we submit to in exchange for other benefits (e.g. police, military protection, etc.).

    A draft for superpowered individuals - as I've already exhaustively explained a year ago - would easily pass constitutional muster for even stronger reasons than the existing draft for males. I don't think you could find a single legal theorist who could articulate reasons why it wouldn't.

    The simple fact is that superpowers completely shatter the paradigm of rights regarding natural abilities, because those powers are potentially catastrophically powerful. Easy example: the uses Cloud 9 has already shown of her powers could be used for trivially easy mass murder by hurling a crowd of people into the sky. She could then escape at a tremendous velocity (I'm not aware of her max speed). Talking about your right to use your inborn ability to fly, read minds, hurl lightning bolts, manipulate the weather, etc. is essentially non-sensical within our real-world concepts of ethics. Our moral philosophies depend on the idea that humans are homologous, but superpowers by definition violate that assumption. All moral philosophies would have to be reevaluated accordingly.

    Now, as for Sentry: your ridiculous hyperbole, Godwining of the thread, etc. make it eminently obvious how much logic and reason you're willing to bring to the discussion. If you feel like making arguments without resorting to insult and exaggeration, I'll be happy to engage in discussion.

    Matt, all I'm saying is that comparing your ability and desire to drive a car to Cloud 9's ability and desire to fly results in an analogy that doesn't really support the idea of the Initiative. Cloud 9 didn't want to be a super hero, she wanted to continue using her powers to fly. Instead of giving her flight training and safety training and then licensing her to fly, they sent her to boot camp to be a soldier in order to be licensed to fly. Likewise, this is tantamount to you being forced into the military to be able to legally drive rather than passing driver's ed and the driver's test to get your license.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • übergeekübergeek Sector 2814Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    übergeek wrote: »
    Short version for those too lazy to read Munch's well thought out post.

    The SHRA is flat out slavery for anyone with powers. You kill for them, or they take your powers/kill you if you don't keep their secrets.

    EDIT Also, this is just how the Skrulls wanted it, which makes it automatically bad despite the few good things that have come from it.

    (a) Slavery is nonsense; at the very least, they're paid. At the very least, you can give up your powers (which you have no right to use, anyway) and leave. These are all inconsistent with the concept of "slavery". Hyperbole is damaging to your argument.

    (b) The government has always had the right to execute treasonous traitors. If you give up government secrets, in the real world, you may face execution. The standard means of dealing with spies for centuries - from monarchies, to dictatorships to democracies including our own - has been to execute them.

    (c) I'm not denying that the Skrulls probably supported, maybe even created, SHRA. At the very least, we know that Pym was manipulating Stark/Richards while they developed their list of ideas to improve the world, SHRA being one of them. That doesn't mean SHRA isn't also right in ways. The validity of SHRA in concept has nothing to do with who authored it.

    a) If you were born with your power (like mutants, even though they're rare again), it's part of who you are and no one has a right to take away a part of you like that provided you don't abuse your power. Sometimes you're like Peter Parker or the F4 and didn't choose to have the power. When it comes down to it, the world is dumping 10 times the resources into catching heroes than simply focussing on the villains, and once those villains are contained, there'd be no need for heroes anymore anyway. Not to say the heroes would go away, but the sheer ridiculousness of time and effort put into the hero round up to make them comply could elminate most of the supervillains either through capture or death at least 3 times over.

    EDIT Also since you bring up cash, then they are in fact forced into indentured servitude.

    b) There's these things called whistleblowers, and the fact that they tried covering up MVP's death was 110% wrong in every way shape and form. Gyrich's testimony is proof of this. If they were on the up and up like you imply, it never would have happened (it also would have been a dull opening to a comic).

    c) I did say some good came of it, but the bad far outweighs it. The Skrulls are poised to kill all 50 teams on a signal if they so choose (I realize there aren't 50 teams, just showing worst case). They also will have access to the gate system from multiple points to help in their campaign.

    übergeek on
    camo_sig.png
  • Look Out it's Sabs!Look Out it's Sabs! Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    So ummm, something not having to do with the Intiative and the registration arguement, anyone else here got the Supernatural comic? I don't know if there are any fans of the show in GV, but it was pretty cool comic.
    It has a small town not on the map that is filled with a lot of young hot chicks who are actually succubi who slowly drain the life out of men while giving them lots of nights filled with hot passion. :P

    Then the father, main character of the comic, hacks them to pieces in a bar fight using a katana sword.

    Look Out it's Sabs! on
    NNID: Sabuiy
    3DS: 2852-6809-9411
  • valiancevaliance Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    My problem with your analogy is that licensing Cloud 9 to fly with her power is functionally equivalent to licensing her to fly a plane. You don't have to join the Air Force to become a licensed pilot. I consider the requirements that were placed on her to be licensed to use her power to be unreasonable. Also being licensed to fly isn't the same as being licensed to beat someone up.

    You're aware that today, all American males are required to register for the Selective Service (i.e. draft), right? You're aware that the US courts have found - resoundingly - that not only is the draft constitutional, but it's also constitutional for it to be male-only.

    Part of living in any given society - American or otherwise - is that you sacrifice some of your freedoms, to protect others and gain new privileges as well. In American society, one of those sacrifices is the Selective Service. Another is eminent domain (the government's ability to seize privately held property for the public good, with compensation). Another is the ability of the government to impose time-place-manner restrictions on speech. All of these laws are restrictions on our natural abilities and rights, which we submit to in exchange for other benefits (e.g. police, military protection, etc.).

    A draft for superpowered individuals - as I've already exhaustively explained a year ago - would easily pass constitutional muster for even stronger reasons than the existing draft for males. I don't think you could find a single legal theorist who could articulate reasons why it wouldn't.

    The simple fact is that superpowers completely shatter the paradigm of rights regarding natural abilities, because those powers are potentially catastrophically powerful. Easy example: the uses Cloud 9 has already shown of her powers could be used for trivially easy mass murder by hurling a crowd of people into the sky. She could then escape at a tremendous velocity (I'm not aware of her max speed). Talking about your right to use your inborn ability to fly, read minds, hurl lightning bolts, manipulate the weather, etc. is essentially non-sensical within our real-world concepts of ethics. Our moral philosophies depend on the idea that humans are homologous, but superpowers by definition violate that assumption. All moral philosophies would have to be reevaluated accordingly.

    Now, as for Sentry: your ridiculous hyperbole, Godwining of the thread, etc. make it eminently obvious how much logic and reason you're willing to bring to the discussion. If you feel like making arguments without resorting to insult and exaggeration, I'll be happy to engage in discussion.

    Matt, all I'm saying is that comparing your ability and desire to drive a car to Cloud 9's ability and desire to fly results in an analogy that doesn't really support the idea of the Initiative. Cloud 9 didn't want to be a super hero, she wanted to continue using her powers to fly. Instead of giving her flight training and safety training and then licensing her to fly, they sent her to boot camp to be a soldier in order to be licensed to fly. Likewise, this is tantamount to you being forced into the military to be able to legally drive rather than passing driver's ed and the driver's test to get your license.

    I tend to agree, but the problem is not just that Cloud 9 can fly. Like most powers, hers can have potentially fatal uses. Allowing a kid to have a power and merely licensing her (i.e. not conscripting them) is like licensing someone to fly an F-14 AND giving them a gun license and concealed carry rights anywhere they wanna go.

    For example you can be licensed to carry a gun legally and not be allowed to bring it certain places (most places: restaurants, schools, hospitals etc.) Allowing anyone with a power that is even potentially fatal into a place where you would not allow a gun, knife, or other deadly weapon is absolutely untenable.

    The problem with metahumans/mutants/superpowered individuals is that their powers are inseparable from their bodies (at least not in a useful, humane manner). So Cyclops can't go to school with normal people because he has a particle cannon in his face. That's a million times worse than allowing a kid to bring a gun to school. Sure if Cyclops blasts some school bully it's assault with a deadly weapon but he shouldn't have a weapon in school in the first place.

    Combine this with matt's selective service argument and I see it very hard to justify not rounding up and drafting everyone who wants to use a power. I'm not saying it was done properly, but on balance it seems like it was the right decision.

    valiance on
  • bobgorilabobgorila Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I bought The Spirit this week on a whim - it was really fun. Kind of felt like a sit-com or something.

    bobgorila on
    I like my women how I like my coffee.

    Anally.
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Matt, all I'm saying is that comparing your ability and desire to drive a car to Cloud 9's ability and desire to fly results in an analogy that doesn't really support the idea of the Initiative. Cloud 9 didn't want to be a super hero, she wanted to continue using her powers to fly. Instead of giving her flight training and safety training and then licensing her to fly, they sent her to boot camp to be a soldier in order to be licensed to fly. Likewise, this is tantamount to you being forced into the military to be able to legally drive rather than passing driver's ed and the driver's test to get your license.

    I understand your point, and I'm not saying it's a bad one, so to make my point more clear I'll shift it a bit.

    I have the innate physical ability to fire a gun, but that doesn't mean the government can't (a) restrict my exercise of that right (whether or not it ACTUALLY harms anyone else) and (b) require training/license before I'm allowed to exercise that right.

    As more than one of us have noted in this thread: Cloud 9's power in particular (which includes levitating others, not just herself) could easily be used as a weapon. Heck, she could just shove her levitating energy-gas into your lungs and asphyxiate you if she didn't want to just hurl you into the sky (leaving you to fall to your doom). We regulate the presence of weapons on schools (not to mention drugs, which would affect any telepath who could alter your mental processes), so how could Cloud 9 be allowed on any campus? What about a hospital?

    If people who are born with deadly weapons - weapons which, we now have documented, can be removed - are allowed to carry them into proscribed areas, then why not people who aren't born with them?

    I agree that it would be far better to just train people in their powers, as opposed to training them as soldiers. That said, I don't think it's wrong to train them as soldiers. Just sub-optimal (especially when putting a known idiot/psycho like Gyrinch in charge).

    mattharvest on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    FCD wrote: »
    While the reality of superpowers would bring up new moral problems, it would not invalidate the humanity and rights of those who possessed said superpowers.

    It doesn't invalidate their humanity, but it may mean that it's impossible for them to be equal members in our society. Not because they're inferior, but because they're superior. Their ability to transcend our literal, physical limitations restricts our rights.

    Examples
    Telepaths: unless we can restrict their use of telepathy, their sheer presence violates the rights of privacy of every person around them.
    Telekinetics: they, like most powers, are tremendously powerful weapons, and we already have acknowledge that we cannot have weapons in hospitals, schools, etc. Moreover, we require training to carry/use other deadly weapons. (this applies to all powers that generate destructive force, too)
    Weather manipulation: do I even need to explain this? Same for elementals (e.g. Magneto or Polaris)
    Technopaths: same issues as telepathy, but for all electronic records

    We could go on, but it should be obvious at this point that the sheer presence of most superpowers is actually itself an invasion of the rights of people around them (in the same way that my carrying an unlicensed gun around violates the rights of people around me).

    mattharvest on
  • ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    (in the same way that my carrying an unlicensed gun around violates the rights of people around me).

    could you clarify what you mean here? i don't understand how that would be the case.

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • MunchMunch Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Nobody's born with a gun in their hand. Nobody's walking down the street and gets bitten by a radioactive gun, forever altering their life.

    Comparing superpowers to a gun is flawed. Superpowers are more like (and I'm not trying to stir a giant shit pot here so just read what I say and try not to get offended right away) certain racial characteristics that people of different races are born with. The government has no right to conscript blacks, asians, or midgets into the army because they feel that people possessing things like melanin, epicanthal folds, or a short stature would be useful to them. Likewise, they have no right to try to "correct" any of those things if someone decides that they don't want to be used by the government due to their different physical characteristics.

    Munch on
  • ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2008
    i think you both have a point, which is why it's a tough subject to debate. on the one hand, the government doesn't have any right to force medical treatment or conscription on a person based on genetic characteristics, but then again, there are no genetic characteristics in this world that can level a city block, so there's a tension there that we don't experience

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Can a movie be my Moment Of The Week?

    'Cause Iron Man was awesome.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • DJ EebsDJ Eebs Moderator, Administrator admin
    edited May 2008
    Sentry wrote: »
    Man... a bash Black Panther derailment and an SHRA derailment filled with Matt's complete and utter nonsense? Both in the same 1-2 week time frame? Man... is it Hanukah again?

    shut up
    Man, a a Sentry posting "complete and utter nonsense" without rebutting any arguments, is it every post of Sentry's again?

    Do you have a "stop whining" button we can press, or is this your only mode?

    And can you explain how it's a derailment when we're talking about the contents of a "moment of the week' scene?

    hey don't respond to a "look who's being retarded" post with "no you're retarded"

    DJ Eebs on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Servo wrote: »
    (in the same way that my carrying an unlicensed gun around violates the rights of people around me).

    could you clarify what you mean here? i don't understand how that would be the case.

    Oh, sorry, I didn't make that as clear as I'd intended: carrying a gun, statistically, dramatically increases the likelihood of the people around me getting shot. This isn't because I'll shoot them necessarily, but rather because it increases the likelihood of any violent situation escalating to gun-fire.

    Moreover, my having a gun simply increases the likelihood of an accidental injury due to a mistake I make, etc. Generally, American lawmakers (and implicitly, voters) have endorsed the idea that carrying an unlicensed weapon is injurious of the people around you by virtue of violating their right to safe company. This doesn't create a tort against the wielder (necessarily) but it does permit the state to make unlicensed carrying a crime.

    mattharvest on
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Matt, all I ask is that you use a reasonable example.

    Just because you get a drivers license or a gun license doesn't give the military to kick down your door and insist "Okay, you're in the army or we take away your ability to drive/shoot a gun".

    Having a license and having the military tell you that you use it for the, you never use it, or you don't get to have it is NOT the same.

    The Muffin Man on
  • McClyMcCly Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Forar wrote: »
    Can a movie be my Moment Of The Week?

    'Cause Iron Man was awesome.

    Agreed. But the final page of Mighty Avengers was pretty sweet, too.

    McCly on
    kbellchewiesig.jpg
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Munch wrote: »
    Nobody's born with a gun in their hand. Nobody's walking down the street and gets bitten by a radioactive gun, forever altering their life.
    No, but then again there's literally no real-world analogy that's going to fully match superpowers. By definition, we're limited to approximations in trying to apply real-world judgments to a world of superpowers. This is part of my overall point: superpowers violate the very assumptions of our moral universe, and require us to reassess everything.
    Comparing superpowers to a gun is flawed. Superpowers are more like (and I'm not trying to stir a giant shit pot here so just read what I say and try not to get offended right away) certain racial characteristics that people of different races are born with.
    No, they're not. Superpowers meaningfully differentiate groups, because they actually refer to a difference in kind not a difference in scale. For example, skin color: "blacks" are not a different type of skin, it's just a variation in how much pigment is expressed. Variations in eyelid structure are variations on the same theme, not entirely new structures. Superpowers, on the other hand, are generally entirely new structures with no analog in a normal human. There is no "normal" human trait that telekinesis is a magnified version of: telekinesis is something new.
    The government has no right to conscript blacks, asians, or midgets into the army because they feel that people possessing things like melanin, epicanthal folds, or a short stature would be useful to them.
    Well, as noted above, your analogy doesn't work either. However, I want to again reassert that if the government could show an actual and demonstrable reason why it needed to target a specific race, ethnicity, sex, etc. for a certain goal, it could do so (meeting "strict scrutiny", i.e. "least restrictive means of achieving a compelling state interest"). In fact, it has done so, and continues to do so: that's why the Selective Service is male only, and compulsory for all American males. They justify it because the "male" physical traits - which are merely stronger, more athletic versions of the female physical traits - are desirable for their goal of an on-demand military. Most 1st World Countries have similar drafts.

    Likewise, they have no right to try to "correct" any of those things if someone decides that they don't want to be used by the government due to their different physical characteristics.
    Well, this is actually a separate issue, but you're misrepresenting what it would mean to remove a superpower: it's not "correcting" something, it's simply preventing you from illegally employing some ability.

    mattharvest on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Matt, all I ask is that you use a reasonable example.

    Just because you get a drivers license or a gun license doesn't give the military to kick down your door and insist "Okay, you're in the army or we take away your ability to drive/shoot a gun".

    Having a license and having the military tell you that you use it for the, you never use it, or you don't get to have it is NOT the same.

    Actually, the government does have the right to say "we're revoking your driver's license if you don't enlist in the military". There is no right to a driver's license (as opposed to there being at least SOME constitutional right to firearms, though I don't think any of us want to get into that here).

    However, as I noted in my post to Mask, part of the problem here is that by definition, superpowers do not have analogues in the real world, because their very nature is to be completely different from the actual human experience.

    While superpowers may sometimes act as metaphors for real-world experience - e.g. mutants for minorities - those are never perfect analogies. For example, while there is no reason for a white person to fear a black person merely by virtue of their race, everyone should be afraid of a child living on their street with telepathic powers, especially if they're not trained in how to use those powers safely.

    The reason the gun analogy is pretty good is this: you're born with the physical ability to cause a great deal of damage to people (in one instance with a tool, in another without any outside tools), but the government says "we're not letting you do that willy-nilly. If you want to exercise that physical ability, we need you to get a license."

    Then, in a SEPARATE step, they say "Hey, we're setting up a selective draft, as we've repeatedly been held to have the power to do, and it's targeted at those with powers." I cannot repeat this enough: in the real world, the Supreme Court has solidly held that the government can have a selective draft based on sex, purely based on the physical attributes of men vs. women. Given that superpowers are of a different type than normal human physical attributes (compare: a man's strength is just a multiple of a woman's, as opposed to being a different type of attribute entirely), superpowers would be an even BETTER basis for a selective draft.

    If you're going to disagree with that reasoning, you're going to have to start by presenting an argument for the selective service itself being unconstitutional.

    mattharvest on
  • MunchMunch Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I'm pretty sure this could be debated for the next three years, but I'm just going to say that matt, you're apparently the Hawkman to my Green Arrow. I think children being conscripted into military service and then put in harm's way, relocated away from their families, and forced to live a military life for the entirety of their existence is wrong, no matter the reason, and you apparently don't.

    And I'll leave it at that.

    Munch on
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Is there an age limit on the SHRA?

    Robos A Go Go on
  • CrimsondudeCrimsondude Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Another is:

    When Cloud 9 arrived, she was a naive child who had no sense of the responsibility she owed other people as a result of having the good fortune of being born with a power.

    First of all, I just want to say that I agree completely with Munch.

    So, that said, when I see someone talking about "owing" society or really anyone because they are different--superior somehow, even--then I just want to vomit because it's total crap. I'll ask this, because I know it is a shared experience we both have: Have you ever been told, or were told while attending law school, that because of your intellect and training, because you were professionally educated in the law and most people are not, that you owed something?

    I have. More times than I can count. And by all types of people. And every time they did, I wanted to vomit. Because it's crap. I don't owe anyone anything just by the fact that I am a lawyer, and most people are not. In fact, I specifically went into the profession without having any regard to it being a public service. And while the bar requires annual commitments of public service in the form of n hours of pro bono service or contributions to legal aid, that is the extent to which I and most lawyers I've met will do. There's also the networking circuit, but that's not done out of the kindness of my heart.

    But it does bring up a rather apt analogy in that while I am mandated a public service commitment as a requirement of maintaining a license in good standing, I'm not being forced to work in the public sector. I especially like it because I can't get drafted into working for the Public Defender's office because they are (always) short-handed and criminal defendants have a right to counsel.

    I wouldn't even be averse to the Initiative being a National Guard-type system (which is what it should be, given the rest of its setup). But then you get the whole argument about being activated and doing 16-month stints active duty wherever the government sends you. But that's still a voluntary model, which the Initiative is not.

    I was born with the innate physical powers required to drive a car, but you can be damned sure I followed the government's laws about getting a driver's license.

    Mask already made my point for me. Your analogy fails when the only way you are allowed to drive is when and where the government tells you that you will.

    (a) Slavery is nonsense; at the very least, they're paid.

    Slaves got fed and housed, too.

    As more than one of us have noted in this thread: Cloud 9's power in particular (which includes levitating others, not just herself) could easily be used as a weapon.

    A use of her power that she did not know she possessed until she was thrown into boot camp and became involved in WWH. My Marine friends didn't really know they could kill a person with their bare hands until they were taught how by the Corps. It's an inherent ability. But it's not a functional ability until it is made so. And there is a huge difference between inherent ability and functional ability. Because by continuing to assert that is based on inherent ability, you're opening a line which goes all the way down the slippery slope to, using a Judge Dredd example, all murderers are alive. Let's ban life.

    Most 1st World Countries have similar drafts.

    Yes, like France. Which has a one-day requirement for conscription. As my roommate told me, he was there just long enough to learn how to salute.

    Crimsondude on
  • MunchMunch Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Is there an age limit on the SHRA?

    There seems to be. Cassie Lang and Cloud 9 are definitely below the age of 18, but there's also another group of young teens (The Young Guardsmen? Something like that.) that aren't officially part of the Initiative, but affiliated in some way. They're the ones that were compared to Hitler youth.

    I can't remember what the deal with them was.

    Munch on
  • CrimsondudeCrimsondude Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Astroturf.

    They were recruited to counter the organic grassroots movement led/caused by the new New Warriors.

    Crimsondude on
  • übergeekübergeek Sector 2814Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Let's put it this way, if they could get their hands on the Mutant Messiah baby, they'd conscript her.....which could be who Mutant Zero is once she returns from the future......

    übergeek on
    camo_sig.png
  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Matt, your basic point seems to be 'we don't have superpowers in real life, so fascism is ok!' Which...doesn't really make much sense. They're still people. The examples you bring up in real life, like the draft, are meant to be used in times of extreme duress...like war....which isn't the case in the marvel world.

    SageinaRage on
    sig.gif
  • NogsNogs Crap, crap, mega crap. Crap, crap, mega crap.Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    just saw Iron Man.

    That is my new Moment of the week.

    Nogs on
    rotate.jpg
    PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Matt, your basic point seems to be 'we don't have superpowers in real life, so fascism is ok!' Which...doesn't really make much sense. They're still people. The examples you bring up in real life, like the draft, are meant to be used in times of extreme duress...like war....which isn't the case in the marvel world.

    If your conception of "fascism" is a draft, you've failed to understand one or both of those words. Your summary indicates that no, you don't understand my basic point at all.

    I'm not going to repeat it again; plenty of people here have clearly understood it, so take the few minutes and read where I've already explained why superpowers change the entire landscape of moral analysis.

    Now as to your concept of the draft, it's rather provincial: the draft is not about emergencies, it's about the ability of the government to know you will serve. Regardless, Marvel's Earth is in a constant state of emergency; they're literally CONSTANTLY (a) being invaded by an alien race, (b) suffering from nation-on-nation warfare (superpowered or otherwise), (c) suffering from civil wars (cough) involving ultrapowerful superhumans, (d) suffering from internal or external terrorism by ultrapowerful superhumans, etc.

    Crimson, answering your question: there's a difference between what people tell you that you owe society/others, and what you tell yourself you owe society/others. This is about how you frame yourself and your relationship with your neighbors and community. I'm a libertarian, and I don't want anyone telling me how to live my life. That said, I also like public services like roads, police, etc. that would be impossible without taxes, etc. Moreover, I don't want to live in a world where there is no communal attachments. As such, I sacrifice some of my individualism in order to contribute to the community. This takes multiple forms (e.g. work, money, taxes, etc.) I do this because I feel obligated to do so by the things I receive from the community, not because anyone tells me I must.

    This desire to improve the community because of how it has improved me is what I would call social responsibility, and it saddens me every time I meet a person who doesn't feel that urge. That's not to say I dedicate every hour of my day to public service, any more than I think it's always morally wrong for someone I meet to not give even an ounce of public service. What it means is that sometimes, your status within a community obligates you to contribute to the community. If you want to be alone, you can leave our community, but we all hope you'd choose to stay and help improve it.

    I don't owe anyone because they individually gave me something, but rather because I acknowledge that I should pay the community back for what it gives me every day.

    mattharvest on
Sign In or Register to comment.