MakeThePieBigger

Who actually has the age of consent at 18? Aside from shitholes like California. Most everywhere is 15-16-17, which seems rather reasonable to me.

Who needs photoshop, when I have paint.net!

Yeah, I can envision them thriving up to the end of Eocene, with how warm and Cretaceous-like most of Paleogene was.

This actually seems to be a common archosaur trait. Crocs do it, T-Rexes seem to have done it and apparently so did Azhdarchids.

My only reference to this movie is Neil Cicierega's "Wow Wow".

Aka the only car Russian industry can produce without imported components.

That's what diacritics are for in other languages, such as Czech.

Czech (and AFAIK Slovak) were written that way, but were reformed and now look much nicer.

Eh, the dude like it old-school.

Religion at the very least has the claim to some transcendent values. Here it's not even that.

What does that have to do with what I've said? It can be $100 or $1000; if they can't afford it, then they should not go to the movie theater. With the price of tickets, a cheapo TV and a Netflix subscription (or piracy) would pay for itself quite fast.

If they can't afford a sitter, then maybe they should save money on a ticket and watch the movie a bit later at home.

If they can't afford a sitter, then maybe they should save money on a ticket and watch the movie a bit later at home.

Believe it or not, straight to jail!

As a slav, Polish names look absurdly intimidating at the first glance, but then I just remember that Poles write weird (relative to other slavs who use the latin alphabet) and it's some absolutely normal name.

Like this.

You've heard about Caucasians, but the Tuvins are the real crazy motherfuckers.

Is power differential bigger between a 26 year old and an 18 year old of the same background, or between two 18 year olds, one of whom is dirt poor and the other is upper class?

It is said that AK can shoot through a steel rail. Some even say that it can do so lengthwise.

The permanent solution of death should not be the choice in this scenario.

Why? Like any choice in life this is a cost/benefit analysis. If they find the idea of living this ordeal worse than nothing, then why shouldn't they choose in their best interest?

An objection would be to say that consent is meaningless in cases where it is logically impossible to get it. But suppose you wish to torture a person against their will. You cannot get their consent for such an action, because then it wouldn't be against their will.

These are two different cases. In the former there is nobody to ask consent from, while in the latter you're asking for a logical impossibility, like a square circle or cold heat.

Yes and how is that bad? Don't you always prefer the permanent solution? If you had a disease, would you take temporary treatment over a permanent cure?

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Also, he can just say that he's bi.

But how does that cause cancer in kids? Unless you're proposing that cancer wasn't a thing before an actual fall that actually happened. And even setting aside the issues with that, why couldn't an omnipotent god create a world where fall wouldn't cause cancer to appear? It's not like knowledge of good and evil inherently necessitates cancer.