Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Darax

Pages: [1]
1
Fun Stuff / Re: Come on chaps - spill the beans
« on: August 02, 2013, 10:44:21 PM »
Both my boyfriend and I shave our armpits. I really don't like the sight of someone's sweaty armpit hair creeping out of a short sleeved top or vest, especially when the weather is as warm as it is!

Each to their own though  :))

2
Apparently he jumped, a friend of my family was there at the time.

Horrible thing to happen, thoughts go out to his family. :(

3
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: Same sex marriage in church
« on: December 15, 2012, 12:29:04 AM »
Basically, would you like the law of this country to allow your Grandad to select your granddaughters future husband.

I don't think so !!

"I don't agree with it, seeing as it does have implications of it negatively effecting human rights because of very old religious doctrine."

So no, I would not like that.

But the two things (being gay marriage and sharia law) are diametrically opposed liberal and ultra conservative political philosophies. If someone is arguing for the liberal side of things I think it's odd to somehow equate it to agreeing with the latter? Wanting an end to discrimination is nowhere near wanting a system passed that is even more prejudiced.

4
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: Same sex marriage in church
« on: December 14, 2012, 08:27:03 PM »
Relating to Henry VIII point... http://24.media.tumblr.com/9c5d1259230fe9b3fad95f37b602bd6e/tumblr_mezh6rUFLI1r8whd0o1_1280.jpg ;)

Honestly I don't know enough about Sharia Law to comment fully on it, but let's use the quote from the first couple of paragraphs from the wikipedia definition.

"Though interpretations of sharia vary between cultures, in its strictest definition it is considered the infallible law of God"

And quoting yourself Fly

"CofE doesn't allow same sex marriages in church. In the eyes of god."

Do the two things not sound vaguely similar? Gay people can't get married because of what the Bible says. Sharia Law is the following of the moral code which is interpreted from the Quran.
It's essentially a more hardcore version of the Church not allowing people to get married.

I don't agree with it, seeing as it does have implications of it negatively effecting human rights because of very old religious doctrine. There is a difference between this and the case of homosexual people not being able to get married as a minority demanding rights, though.

Religion is, at the end of a day a choice. Beliefs can be changed to fit in with modern society; and they should be. Homosexuality isn't a choice. It's not something that people can opt out of, it's the way they were born. It's in their genetics.

If the happiness of two people being in love and being able to join together under the eyes of god causes the country to fall into chaos, then I think it's a pretty daft country that we live in.

5
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: Same sex marriage in church
« on: December 14, 2012, 01:00:43 AM »
"“I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here. I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or is it okay to call the police? Here’s one that’s really important ‘cause we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town: Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you? ”
—    Jed Bartlet, The West Wing

We don't follow everything that the bible says because much of it is outdated. Examples above. Deciding to say that gay people can't get married due to some references in the bible about homosexuality being a sin is flat out discrimination. Imagine saying that only white people can get married, though black people can have civil ceremonies. It's ridiculous, and there's not really any way of sugar coating that.

Sure, the majority might not care, but it's still something that's representing them as less, or wrong compared to heterosexual people. "No, you can't get married as you are built wrong in a genetic fashion". Equality shouldn't be done in half measures.

Additionally, saying that gay marriage is wrong because it won't lead to the procreation of children; does this mean we should also strip the right to get married from people who are infertile and physically can't have children? Can we tell people who don't want to have children because of whatever reason they can't get married because they'll be missing the point?

As someone with gay friends who do support gay marriage, it's something I feel pretty strongly on haha.

6
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: £125k cycle path for Chesterfield
« on: July 04, 2012, 02:01:57 AM »
Pretty much agreed, I don't think people pay enough attention to cyclists on the road whether there's a cycle path or not :s As much as I'd prefer to cycle everywhere, this wouldn't encourage me because too many people are dangerous on the roads.

I never really understood the logic of making cyclists ride on roads anyway.

Who is more likely to be seriously harmed- a pedestrian bumped by a cyclist or a cyclist hit by a car?
Hm :s
I was in Valencia in spain quite recently and that would have been a really nice place to cycle- most of the pavements were halved off between pedestrian/cyclist areas. Don't think I saw a single part where cyclists had to travel on the road. Makes me wish more of england was similar!
 
I meant the cycle lanes with physical barriers fron the road not the one cars use to park in
Or more things like this, yes.

edit- Unless I've been daft and it is actually not on the road? Hard to tell from that article.

7
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: A1 printing chesterfield? (Help!)
« on: June 13, 2012, 01:30:50 PM »
I've got four different pages that I need one print each of :) Thanks for the suggestions, I'll go and have a nip around when I'm free :)

8
Chesterfield Discussion / A1 printing chesterfield? (Help!)
« on: June 13, 2012, 02:52:22 AM »
Does anyone here happen to know any places that can print A1 size posters for a (relatively) good price and quality in Chesterfield?

I've been having a look via google, but without much success, and can't remember any off the top of my head.

Cheers  ;D

9
General Discussion / Re: Drunken Rape Cases
« on: May 29, 2012, 09:24:08 PM »
My personal opinion is that if someone is visibly drunk and you want to get into bed with them, even if they are consenting, -you- should say no and wait until they're more sober so you can make sure they weren't just drunk talking. Even if they are insistent.

If someone got really drunk and told you to take all their money, it's would be common decency to realise they're really drunk and in reality would rather to keep their money. Not sure why it's so different when it comes to sex.

If you were genuinely interested, it's not like it'll kill you to wait and find out whether they meant it, is it?
And if you were just hoping for a quick fumble and you're a bit desperate... not to be massively crude, but just go home and 'relieve your frustrations' yourself.

Considerably less dodgy than getting it on with someone who is probably not going to remember consenting, or anything that happened the night before.

This goes for both genders. Unless they can look you in the eye while entirely sober and go "Yes, I would like to have sex with you" then just don't.

No, people shouldn't get so drunk and be more responsible for themselves, but they do, and they don't, so hey.


10
Just thinking what 'I' did as a child, played in the park at the back of the house or went fishing in the Rec, went to chapel twice on Sundays, tin can lurky, hide and seek, hopscotch, spinning top, hoola hoop, snowball fights, roller skates, bike, on dark nights we played board games with friends or listened to music. Didn't have any youth clubs back then --- didn't get into trouble either!

As someone who is a vaguely youngish person I can say some of those activities go off the list as you hit teenager years;
Either because they're not activities seen as acceptable within your age group, which most people will avoid for fear of bullying (which is, from my experience dealt with abysmally in schools (an entirely different can of worms))
 or
Because people see a group of teenagers out and about and think they're trying to cause trouble. Which is discouraging; I personally didn't like it when I was just walking to the shop with a group of friends a few years back only to be glared at by adults/elderly people who were passing by. It really does not make me feel more inclined to be more involved with society. I won't say that this is the attitude of all people, but it has been a common one that I have personally encountered.

Then again, I might just have been unlucky :P

I could ramble on about a few more examples but I would probably make bugger all sense!

Replying more to the main post, I know more than one person who would be in a far worse position today than they would be if the youth clubs didn't exist. I haven't been to them myself, but would have been extremely saddened to see them go.

11
Now here's a coincidence - my grandson got painted by that guy on the wall of kids play area by the Chamber of Commerce.

Didn't he or his group/company do some buildings down Brampton last year? I seem to remember a florist

Think so, just found the company that did it :)

 http://www.urbancanvas.co.uk/Art/Public_Art.html

Some really nice looking things on there, makes me wonder what they could have done around chesterfield.

12
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: 20mph speed limit
« on: May 04, 2012, 12:57:12 AM »
Fuck me Darax  - that's a post and a quarter - welcome to Chesterfield Online :)

Ta Pete, I don't normally ramble on that much but  ::) better out than in

13
...I honestly think those hands sticking out of the wall are going to be fairly creepy.

I cannot for the life of me remember the bloke's name, but I personally would have thought something like this would have been better
http://www.geolocation.ws/v/W/File:Bridge%20Art%20-%20geograph.org.uk%20-%201193016.jpg/-/en (which is under the bridge leading to Queen's Park). He's done a few other gorgeous mural type things around chesterfield, and they just seem a bit more noticeable/attractive/actually involving some skill to produce (forever a modern art sceptic. )

Plus helping to support a local artist, which I'm not sure the planned sculptures will be doing :s

Ah well, pipe dreams :P Bit late to change it now, just hope that it really does bring more people to chesterfield in the end.

14
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: 20mph speed limit
« on: May 04, 2012, 12:34:53 AM »
I understand it near schools, but for residential areas a large part of me thinks that people should just learn to cross the road safely.

I've driven through Sheffield recently, and the amount of times people decided to cross on a blind corner of a busy road when there's a traffic light system a couple of metres away... :@ I like to think I'm an observant, if paranoid driver, but still ended up doing about three/four emergency stops within about half an hour of driving.
I know a couple of people who have had serious accidents in sheffield, and both of them came about because they decided to cross without looking properly or at an unsafe point. Though yes, having a lower speed limit could reduce the amount of accidents (because if drivers are going at 20 it's going to be a pretty great achievement if they can't stop/end up doing any serious damage), it seems a bit harsh to put all the blame for accidents on drivers.


For residential areas with kids, parents should probably teach them not to play in the middle of the road (another thing I've seen fairly frequently) , or be there to supervise. It's something I had drilled into my head from an early age and the only near accidents I've been involved in are ones involving vehicles taking corners too fast and ending up mounting the curb a couple of feet from where I was walking.  Perhaps I've been lucky.

Yeah, there are a lot of unsafe drivers, but I think it'd be more beneficial to teach pedestrians to watch out for them, seeing as said unsafe drivers are unlikely to stick to speed limits anyway.

This sounds a bit harsh on pedestrians, but I honestly prefer to, and spend more time walking around chesterfield than driving. I just don't believe that a lower speed limit will stop any drivers who are already unsafe, and have, so far, had worse experiences with pedestrians than vehicle owners.  I might just be unlucky, though :P

15
Chesterfield Discussion / Re: Any gamers on here?
« on: March 29, 2012, 08:19:16 AM »
I'd say check out Granger games (Shop next to peacocks in town) CEX (slightly up the street from that), and Gamestation, all of which are located in chesterfield. Between them they've always got a good selection of games.

He's probably better off going to them now anyway, Game was always a bit pricey :)

Pages: [1]
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk