Dolph

You know, this leads to a question I ask myself, about my morality. And I do not belong to an organised religion: Given that I keep a great deal of my energy and potential solely to myself when it could do great good, do the comparatively minor good moral things I do make me a moral person? Relative to some other people yes. In more absolute terms - an absolute no. It makes me a selfish egoistic bastard who's primarily looking out for number one. Just like 99.95% of the rest of the population. Now, I do not have a dogma which compels me to do good - it's all touchy-feely inner moral compass. You on the other hand have on authority of God a set of guidelines to follow. My question is: how is it possible to feel like a moral human being, knowing you're (you in a general sense) not doing everything you can? It'd be an even harder question for you to answer, given the authority you have behind you. Unless there are some loopholes I am unaware of. I don't do much evil. I do some good. I could do a shitload more. Like most people. What does that make us?

[reply So what? If you think its stupid don't participate in it. Your're doing me a disservice and have built a strawman. On top of that you come across in an offensive manner. Perhaps my writing was provocative or ambiguous. I'll try to rephrase, using my mind rather than my bad inner child. I'm talking of the concept of creation of division, not whether I plan to attend the boogie. I wish the organisers and the participaters the best of times and hope it goes huge. I, on a conceptual level, disagree with the basic premise that sexuality should be a major factor in any activity where its relevance is nearly nil. In skydiving I feel this is the case. For the actual mechanics of freefall and canopy piloting, one's sexuality has very little to say. For the social aspect, I've found skydivers at least where I live to be extremely open with issues of sexuality. As such, I believe there is little actual need for promoting equal rights and treatment for people of various different-than-the-norm sexual orientation on the social scene of a dropzone. In the places I've been, it's already there. In places where it's not, it needs to be fixed on a local level by changing the culture. A rainbow boogie is unlikely to have any affect there. Artificially creating a divide where little was before is, in my opinion, not a good thing. I'd even go as far as to agree with my bad inner child in calling it a stupid idea. The boogie may be the "teh best thing evahh" but the concept behind it really irks me. Maybe it is so, maybe it's not. It'd be good if I am wrong.

I would say the exact same thing. Basically, I think discrimination, pro or against, is stupid. One legged, deaf, transvestite, blonde, Aryan what have you. Why do we do this stuff? Why do we voluntarily create an atmosphere of division? It's a nice tangent, but not really relevant. "ooh I am a programmer we're gonna have coding things and do coding stuff! Yayy!" And almost as a sidethought "oh you ca come too, if you're a no-coding friend, but this is all about MEEEE and my |337n3$$. Your participation is secondary, if at all. Toodlepipski" Doesn't that just look stupid to you?

C'mon Jeff, you gotta admit that the demographics at an ordinary day at the DZ is heavily tilted in favour of white young males and the culture they represent. We're most comfortable in our own sub culture. Yeah that's kinda what pisses me off about this too. The "ooh I am gay we're gonna have gay things and do gay stuff! Yayy!" And almost as a sidethought "oh you ca come too, if you're a friend, but this is all about MEEEE and my sexual orientation. Your participation is secondary, if at all. Toodlepipski". Of course that's probably my "inner child" - the bad half - speaking. I listen to both of 'em. Then again, my attitude is: "wtf, let people do whatever they want. It doesn't affect me. If it does, I'll deal with it like I always do. No change." Which is the thing - for me, it isn't a big deal unless I make it so. Live and let live. Let people do their thing if it makes them happy. Others are happy, I'm passingly mildly annoyed because the discriminating factor is so fundamentally *stupid* (sexual orientation). ANY discrimination, be it a pro- or against rally, only further contributes to an Us vs Them atmosphere. And that mildly annoys me for a while.

Minorities get together, hang out, have fun. Being a straight white male puts you in the majority. Any basic day at the DZ is a "straight-white-male" day. Having said that, I don't care much for segregated boogies, be it on sexual orientation, gender or discipline. Of course I'm a hypocrite so will gladly attend freefly oriented ones. If I was gay, a rainbow boogie would be cool. If I was a chick, Chicks Rock boogie would kick ass. If I was gay, a chick and a flatflyer, a flatfly rainbow chicks rock festival would be awesome. I'll try to organise a white-straight-male-freefly boogie some day. It's just that people keep beating me to it

Well, that's true to a certain extent. I'm a newbie myself - two and a half year in the sport, 890 jumps or so. Even so, I've already been unfortunate enough to watch some bad stuff. I'll say "that's pretty small, considering your weight and experience" to someone who's radically downsizing at an early time. Even if he or she doesn't ask. Maybe I'm being a little dumb there, considering I myself don't have much experience to base it on. I'd feel pretty shitty if I didn't and something happened though. I understand your point though and am just nitpicking. You're right when you say the lower timer tend to be very outspoken with opinions and experiences whereas the veterans are more laid back. For relative newbies such as myself it can sometimes be a struggle to not let the ego get in front of experience and skills. I'm constantly wondering whether it's the case with myself and my friends.

Yeah, back on topic. I want a skyhook in my Odyssey. Please. I understand Mr Booth's thinking about establishing a firm reputation for the Skyhook before it's bastardised by other manufacturers much like the three rings. It ought to be possible to get a rough time table though. RWS knows how many rigs they sell a year. Malfunction rate is generally known. Of course stochastic variables associated with consumer confidence are hard to know. Anyway, given what we know, what is a bid on a time table for Skyhook licensing?

Neither. I dump my pilot chute and wait for stuff to happen. If ít doesn't I'll try to get an overview of the situation and fix it. A year ago, I'd give it a quick glance, watching the pilot chute as I threw it. Stopped doing that when I downsized. Those "but-I-Didn't_do_anything_and_it_is_still_spinning_me_around openings suggested that messing with body position by looking during deployment probably isn't a good idea.

Well He knew before he did the Creation thing. In fact, he made this rather elaborate design. All variables known, all possible paths of execution known all come-to-be paths of execution known. As a programmer, being able to do that would be just amazingly brilliant, given 10 billion users and 5 billion parallel threads just for humans alone. My point is he knows exactly what will happen, when and how. To expect anything less that that the design does exactly what it was designed to do from an omniscient being is not love. It is, at best, ego masturbation and at worst criminally evil in itself. I mean, I'd have a serious talk about the design that forced all atrocities in the world into happening. Here's an analogy for you, a nerdy one: //Gonna make a variable, an integer int i = 1; //Gonna increment it i++; //See if cast Adam and Eve from Paradise if(i > 1){ CastFromParadise(); CreateAtrocitiesThreads(); BlameTheDevil(); ExcuseOfTheDay("Free will!"); Console.Write("MUahahahahahah!"); } else{ //YAH AS IF } Just doesn't make sense not to take responsibility for what you design and create.

And to burp or have non-stylish clothes. That needs to be illegal too.

Hey Nighingale I feel you're misrepresenting my question to Narcimund. Perhaps you missed some of what I typed: Just to clarify.

But he already knows all the paths that will be walked right? He's ominiscient, after all. Not trying to pull your leg here. If he is omniscient, he knows. If his knowledge where a database we could: SELECT * FROM Life_Of_Brian Loop over the result, output every decision. He knows everything. He set everything in motion. He knew before he did this what the outcome would be. He has always known. The difference as described is a matter of semantics.

I don't believe for a second that only American minorities are poor and have a hard life. In fact, suggesting that is prejudism in itself. I know hoodlums living rough, unprivileged lives from the get-go - and their ethnicity is caucasian. Not bad people, and not good either. What "rights" do these people, who are a minority (although not a racial one) have that ordinary Joe doesn't? That Blacks or Mexicans don't? I can guarantee you that their position in life has been used against them. What words are they permitted to make their own? Who're we to judge? If ethnicity is the lone arbitrator, that's a pretty narrow, messed up way of measuring.

"And He Shall Gain An Intimate Understanding Of Strap-Ons". There I go, ruining a perfectly good thread.

Explain the difference?

They stopped doing that? My, the sport has wussifyed since I quit. "Harrasment training" under the right circumstances teaches valuable life saving skills that are needed if one intends to stay alive in the sport for a long time. I remember catching flak from the local CMAS divers - was supposed to dive to the bottom of the pool (4m) undon my stuff, take it on again and clear my mask on the way up. Problem is I am naturally bouyant, so I had to do it while struggling to stay down. I did it but it didn't "look good enough, it looked struggling" to the old timers, so they had a guy go with me and physically hold me down (even yanking me around a bit) while I donned my stuff. Once done, he held on for maybe 15 seconds more to see how I'd react. Sure beats "noooo no can't do that little Miss Tropical Diver might mess up her mascara" that PADI must have turned into.

Ain't that the truth. I'm new to the sport myself (coming up on three years). Got a friend that's even newer (coming up on two years). Started off giving him advice - now he out-swoops my ass and has nearly closed the jump-gap between us. Be nice to newbies. Some of them are gonna haul ass and leave you eating dust, jump-, skill- and social-wise.

To his defense, the word "fuck" applies just about equally to all races. The words nigga/nigger doesn't. Having said that, all this "white boy" "niggah" stuff is indicative of humans being far less "socially evolved" than we like to think. Use of such generic terms have as much meaning to me as "YOU! WITH THE PANTS! PANTS-GUY!" to me. In fact, any time anyone will use generic stereotypical words, my response shall from now be PANTS-. So whaddup, PANTS-GUY?

Hi Narcimund. Am wondering what your position is to the following situation: All people, regardless of gender can have a recognized union with anyone they wish, limited only by some arbitrary age decided on a state level. These union holds the exact same legal rights as marriage currently does. It'd be fair to call this union a "secular marriage" although I'd advise against it, given the religious connotations marriage has. If such a situation should arise, the religious folks of whatever persuasion can exclude those whom they feel are not worthy. Basically, organised religions are private clubs on a large scale that for some reason must be treated differently because of their spiritual foundation - a whole other thread, getting off on a tangent there. Would you be satisfied with a situation where you could not be married in the Christian marriage because of some silly rules they have from their Dude at the Top, but where you'd get an alternative that provides you with the same legal rights? Or do you think it is within your rights to be married in Christ name so to speak? Just intended for clarification and personal curiosity. Perhaps I am presenting a false choice to you - if there are other acceptable solutions, how do you see them? hear hear Micro. I find it strange that people seem incapable of understanding that love can flourish between members of the same gender - in many forms.

So Say You. Others might find Britney Spears inspiring, showing that intelligence isn't needed to be succesful. Beauty is more important. Drive, selecting good managers, carefully following a plan and getting fake boobies and showing lots of skin while performing seductive movements will get ya up there snappety-snap! That sure as hell beats any dumb broad willing to work hard at some dumb sports discipline that, like, takes physical effort and stuff. Just saying...

Part of the training is to deal with being unstable. If you've demonstrated that you're able to be stable after a planned temporary period of instability, that' very good. It'll give you confidence and teach you life saving skills. Most often though, you'll find yourself unstable in a a non-planned manner. Dealing with this should further increase your confidence in yourself and give you another tool used to survive. It'd depend on circumstances of course. Whether an instructor made you unstable on purpose or by accident doesn't matter onceyou're in the air - it's a matter that has to be dealt with. It's better to be trained and prepared for unplanned instabilitiy than to not be. In a sense, increasing the risk in training can decrease the risk once "live". A judgement call though with many variables. To categorically deny that some types of training exercises, while increasing the risk during training, also have benefits outside training that may be very valuable is to go over the top IMHO. What is it the soldiers say - train like you fight - fight like you train.

A matter of rule enforcement perhaps? Locally in Denmark, spotting is also required. When I had to get my checkout for that, I had to spot 5 times. Two first were relatively simple, where I was given ample time and a good apprach by the polit. The next two I had plenty of time, but pretty bad final by the pilot. The last one I had short time and a bad final. I dumped on #4 and had to redo it. Landed in, but didn't get out at the right place. I suppose if sticking yer head out the door and saying "mmm yup this is ok" qualifies as "spotting", then having such a requirement is silly and pointless. But, and I gather this strengthens your point, we only run small Cessna's in Denmark. Even as a newbie, you're not gonna be able to avoid being responsible for the (first) spot. And of course there's some general peer pressure too - if you land out on someone else's bad spot, it's likely you are going to catch more shit than the person spotting - everyone is responsible for their own spot after all. Having small clubs and small planes encourages good spotting. On the two trips abroad I've been on (big turbine DZs) spotting was done exclusively by the pilot. We even had some tandem masters getting extremely angry after a guy from our club ordered a go-around because of bad spot/clouds. I wonder if he had had the courage and confidence to do that had he not been proficient in spotting.

The thing about skydiving and safety.... is that it's not as safe as skydivers claim. And not as dangerous as the media presents it. It's important not to have any illusions to the very real dangers in the sport. People get hurt and die skydiving each year and if you're in the sport long enough, chances are you're going to witness both things. They may happen to you. Having said that, there are great rewards in the sport. It's just best to have a good understanding of the risks involved - and that goes beyound "yeah sometimes it's dangerous

The delay is explained that it took a while for the Danish Imans to create an uproar and provide various groups with false drawings. Unfortunately, what I'm saying is not untrue. There wasn't a big uproar - except a little back home here. Then these dudes made up some more provocative drawings and took 'em with 'em abroad to stir shit. Same people say one thing "peace and tolerance" here in Denmark and then are caught on TV inciting hatred in Muslim countries. I am disgusted by these people - not because they are Muslim or Imans, but because they are two tongued liars full of hatred and unappreciative of/working against freedoms that have been granted to them. Fortunately, things are pretty mellow here. No mosques have been burned and there hasn't been a blacklash against Danish muslims on any significant scale. I hope that doesn't change. Depends on external circumstances I think.

This is the same basic conclusion I've arrived at. But that is more of a children/family issue than one of same-sex marriage. People have children without being married or while having a same-sex partner today, so it is not prohibited today at least in the country where I live. I don't practise any organised religion so I don't oppose anything on religious grounds. On the issue of marriage - this is a religious institution and given that there is religious freedom, I feel it is appropriate that adherents/creators of religions are free to define their own dogma and rituals. That includes moral values on what is "right" and "wrong". Unfortunately, such individuals have in the past been highly succesful in tying their religious values to things of a secular nature - in the case of marriage to tax breaks and other benefits. These benefits should not be excluded for people in much the same situation but with other religious values. Guess I am saying: marriage tends to be a religious institution. Let each religion dictate the terms, since religion is a choice. Allow the freedom not to follow religions and allow the *same benefits* to those that don't as to those that do follow some predefined dogma. The same sex parents/single mom/single dad/ one of each situation and its influence on the psychology of kids is a whole different can of worms and one where the most important variables do not appears to be the gender or the number of parents involved.